>> /** >> + * the decoding table size. >> + */ >> + private static final int DECODING_TABLE_SIZE = 256; >> + > > The Javadoc does not say why the value 256 is used, so the number is > still a magic number ... >
What should be added more than `the decoding table size` in javadoc? I'd rather continue investing time on a private static field of a package-private class... > > In this case, I'm not sure that using a constant add any benefit as > the value was only used once. > I think Checkstyle is being too strict here; I suggest leaving this > change, but I don't see a need to fix everything the Checkstyle does > not like. > Agreed - I had two options: 1) suppress the rule; 2) just make checkstyle happy. Even if I was really tempted by #1, at the end I went to #2 to be conform to more popular way of coding - I sure someone would have fixed it, sooner or later... http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ http://twitter.com/simonetripodi http://www.99soft.org/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
